Map Name: The Pueblo Revolt of 1680Mapmaker(s): WestWindNumber of Territories: 52 starting + 6 Pueblos + 6 Revolution Incitement territories + 10 Religion territories = 74Special Features: Bonuses for developing/defending religion, bonus for using your resources to incite a revolutionWhat Makes This Map Worthy of Being Made: First, the subject matter is pretty unique. We only have a few maps that even mention the word "revolution", and few of those actually incorporate it into the gameplay. I also feel that adding a "culture" aspect to the gameplay gives it more depth and historical context. Also, this region of the United States (around New Mexico) has not really been used in a map yet, and it's a pretty unique area.

My comment for now: I think you need to explain what the "Pueblos" do, ther funktion and so on. Its kind of foggy to me

There's 2 different types of Pueblos, major and minor.

Major Pueblos give access to the "Revolution Incitement" territories, which give a bonus based on how many "Revolution Incitement" territories you hold as well as how many minor Pueblos you hold. Major Pueblos connect to the territory below them.

Minor Pueblos are just part of territories. They only give you a bonus if you hold a certain amount of "Revolution Incitement" territories.

For example, if you held all 6 Revolution Incitement territories as well as Acoma, Estancia, and Isleta, you would get a +6 bonus because each minor Pueblo is now worth +2. If, however, you only held 4 Revolution Incitement territories you would only have a +3 bonus because each minor Pueblo would only be worth +1.

Im sorry for being a here, but it have taking me a while trying to understand the legend and i think i get it now, you can one way atack from the ground map in to the legend,Its a nice gameplay you have come up with and Im not saying that you should change it, but in my opinion I think you need to make the rule more simple for the players of all kind (retardts like me), cut it out in cardbord or bend it in neon, take a look at Conquer Rome map http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=134778not complitly same feature but kind of, where "capital of Diocesis can atack one way to Vicarius seat" I think thats very simply illustrated.

My comment for now: I think you need to explain what the "Pueblos" do, ther funktion and so on. Its kind of foggy to me

There's 2 different types of Pueblos, major and minor.

Major Pueblos give access to the "Revolution Incitement" territories, which give a bonus based on how many "Revolution Incitement" territories you hold as well as how many minor Pueblos you hold. Major Pueblos connect to the territory below them.

Minor Pueblos are just part of territories. They only give you a bonus if you hold a certain amount of "Revolution Incitement" territories.

For example, if you held all 6 Revolution Incitement territories as well as Acoma, Estancia, and Isleta, you would get a +6 bonus because each minor Pueblo is now worth +2. If, however, you only held 4 Revolution Incitement territories you would only have a +3 bonus because each minor Pueblo would only be worth +1.

Im sorry for being a here, but it have taking me a while trying to understand the legend and i think i get it now, you can one way atack from the ground map in to the legend,Its a nice gameplay you have come up with and Im not saying that you should change it, but in my opinion I think you need to make the rule more simple for the players of all kind (retardts like me), cut it out in cardbord or bend it in neon, take a look at Conquer Rome map http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=134778not complitly same feature but kind of, where "capital of Diocesis can atack one way to Vicarius seat" I think thats very simply illustrated.

I like your dusty style, keep it up

Hm. I'm trying to think of easier ways to explain it than saying that the incitement territories are one way attacked by their corresponding Pueblo, and that the Pueblos connect to the terts below them. Illustrations are nice, but take up a lot of room and I'm not sure it would help out in this case. Any other re-phrasing you can come up with?

WestWind wrote:Hm. I'm trying to think of easier ways to explain it than saying that the incitement territories are one way attacked by their corresponding Pueblo, and that the Pueblos connect to the terts below them. Illustrations are nice, but take up a lot of room and I'm not sure it would help out in this case. Any other re-phrasing you can come up with?

maby you could call it "one way atacked by territorys with same name" instead of calling it "corresponding"

WestWind wrote:Hm. I'm trying to think of easier ways to explain it than saying that the incitement territories are one way attacked by their corresponding Pueblo, and that the Pueblos connect to the terts below them. Illustrations are nice, but take up a lot of room and I'm not sure it would help out in this case. Any other re-phrasing you can come up with?

maby you could call it "one way atacked by territorys with same name" instead of calling it "corresponding"

anohter thing, why are they placed so close together ?

Hm ok I can do that fix.

I assume you're asking about the major Pueblos? For better or for worse, that's where they are/were in real life. I actually spaced them out a little bit more. The Rio Grande is basically the lifeline for that region, so it makes sense that most of the major settlements would be along it. While that's pretty cool, it makes the gameplay a little bit of a pain. What I really want to do is make it so that the outer parts of the maps get some focus and attention as well. What I'm envisioning is the players starting by securing regional/religion bonuses first, then moving in to the center of the map to go for the big bonus. If anyone has suggestions, criticisms, or comments about this please let me know

I assume you're asking about the major Pueblos? For better or for worse, that's where they are/were in real life. I actually spaced them out a little bit more. The Rio Grande is basically the lifeline for that region, so it makes sense that most of the major settlements would be along it. While that's pretty cool, it makes the gameplay a little bit of a pain. What I really want to do is make it so that the outer parts of the maps get some focus and attention as well. What I'm envisioning is the players starting by securing regional/religion bonuses first, then moving in to the center of the map to go for the big bonus. If anyone has suggestions, criticisms, or comments about this please let me know

Also, thank you for the sticky IH!

Yes the major Pueblos, I can understand that you want to make it historial correct, but sometimes for the gameplay (what is most importend) you must find the perfect balance, and if that meens that you must do some thing that dont excist in real life, it will the bedst for your map. you could split some of the territoryes between them so they dont connect, or move a coupple of major Pueblos to the sides.just a suggestion

There's several things about this map that could use some graphical attention...

GIMP. I'm far from an expert at it and just kinda learn as I go. If you start pointing out issues I'd be fine teaching myself how to address them

Also, the Rio Grande Gorge runs just south of Taos and would be a great impassible. I could probably fudge it so it ran on the southern border of Picuris, which might break up the Rio Grande regions a little bit.

And one more final thought: The Navajo were notorious raiders of the Pueblo tribes. How's the idea of adding in a territory in the Navajo bonus region that can bombard minor pueblos? The map is probably complex enough already, but this would add some encouragement to stick around in the western half of the map.

natty_dread wrote:Firstly, how do you draw your territory borders and icons? The line work seems a bit messy and pixelated... I can probably suggest a few things to fix that. Do you use a mouse or tablet?

I use a tablet, usually at a 1-pixel sized non-fuzzy brush. I'm pretty new to brushes, which might explain that issue.

IH- Since the current system seems to be a little confusing for people, how about making it like this?

WestWind wrote:I use a tablet, usually at a 1-pixel sized non-fuzzy brush. I'm pretty new to brushes, which might explain that issue.

Ok, hm, well. Usually paintbrush isn't necessarily the best for creating smooth lines, especially thin ones... Paintbrush is more useful when you want to do more special things, but for simple lines, the ink tool is better.

You can adjust the size of the ink tool much more accurately, on a 0,1 pixel scale, and the way it's rendered makes it much better when you want to create sharp, smooth lines.

When you select the ink tool, you get the tool options with 2 sections: first is adjustment, and under it is size and angle. The angle doesn't matter, the size I usually set anywhere between 0,5 and 2,0. Then there's the sensitivity section, and under it is size again, tilt & speed, these control how the tablet input affects the line. If you want to draw consistent lines, set them all at zero, that way your line thickness stays the same regardless of pressure. That's usually the best setting for drawing borders, except if you want to do lines that look more hand-drawn, then it's good to add some size sensitivity - this will vary the size according to the tablet pressure (if your tablet supports pressure sensitivity, all decent tablets should though) so that if you set it at 0,5, the line thickness varies between (0,5 * size) to (1,5 * size).

Under the sliders you'll have the type/shape settings, which control the brush shape, but unless you want to do calligraphy, you can just keep it as a regular round brush.

Also, when you draw lines, work at a 200% zoom at least, for tight spots maybe even higher. This way you'll get twice the accuracy for your lines. Remember to raise the pen at reasonable intervals, so if you have to undo you won't have to redraw huge stretches of line... for that matter, you can always use eraser instead of undo. If you have a tablet that has an eraser, you can set a different tool for the tip and the eraser, so it's easy to switch between them...

Awesome, thanks natty I was wondering why my lines looked glitchy. My next update will probably have quite a few graphical re-dos with your advice.

Here's the newest update: More gameplay than anything.

Click image to enlarge.

Changes:-Re-did the revolution bonus structure. Now it's simply the number of minor pueblos you control times the number of revolution incitement territories you control. So if you controlled all 6 minor pueblos and all 6 revolution incitement territories, you'd have yourself a nice +36 bonus. Also changed some wording around in the legend- hopefully it makes more sense.-Added a few mountain ranges to the Navajo Territory region. It seemed a little wide open, and this should make that area a little easier to conquer and defend.-Added some shadows to the mountains for graphical fun.

Another update- all graphics on this one. Took natty's advice with using the ink tool, and I like the results. Except for the region boundaries- I'll probably go through with a smaller brush on the next update.

Click image to enlarge.

In addition to changing the territory lines, I also re-did most of the icons using the ink tool. Let me know what you think.

I think the pen and ink style you have going is pretty stellar. Your bonus minimap looks way out of place with the style of you have going on, and so do the region texts. Could you find a font similar to your legend, or experiment with your legend text as region names?

You also probably want to add a touch of buffer to the text "Pueblo Religion" and "Spanish Religion" from the black top bar they are near. Related to these two, it might be worthwhile to see what you can do to improve readability of the important information (such as the numbers), since they kind of get lost.

It might be worthwhile to extend the legend a few more millimeters higher, since I don't think it would have an impact on the gameboard by much, to allow for some greater legend room---it is very dense.

Well the borders look better now, but there are a few places with smudges, that kinda look you got a bit sloppy there... Like the borders below Vallecitos & Villaneuva for example.

Also, the background texture doesn't look too natural... try tweaking it a bit, experiment with it, mix it with other textures, gradients, etc. It's always good to experiment with things, that's how you learn new stuff.

Things that need to be clarified.Deescription of the major pueblos says they connect to territory below them. Description of revolution says they are one-way attacked by the matching name pueblo. There is no reason these should be different.

Can the Kiva and missin bombard the symbols the self or just the territory with the symbol in it?

Things that are a problem with the map:The Spanish forces are more powerful than the Pueblans. Holding both missions gives you a minor AND major pueblo, Kiva only gives a minor. Should be changed.

Major Concept Flaw:Basically, all the icons at the bottom are one-way attacked. That means putting troops there throws them away. However all the religious items at the bottom are bombardable. This means that only putting 1 at each is not a valid option. So, any player going for a bonus there will have to throw all his troops into defense. The bonuses will therefore be too hard to get.Unless something about this is changed, this map will fail.

Ideas on how to fix(I am sure there are countless other possibilities): make each icon give a bonus, or make the threshold smaller (bonus at 2 icons instead of 4). This will make capturing a bonus a realistic proposition.

Idea 2: get rid of the bottom part of the icons and make the territory itself the icon region

It would appear that development of this map has stalled. If the mapmaker wants to continue with the map, then one of the Foundry Moderators will be able to help put the thread back into the Foundry system, after an update has been made.

The six months of vacation for this map has expired and this map will now be labeled as [Abandoned]. If the original mapmaker wants to continue this map project that's fine but an update must provided. From this moment anyone else is free to take this project without the original mapmaker permission, but it has to be started from scratch.